Monday, January 30, 2012

An update on all the people not running for Liberal leadership

It's been six months since I last looked in on the field of possible Liberal leadership candidates, and that's because, well, there's not much to report. Apart from speculation surrounding the interim leader, there's been little chatter in the media, on blogs, or in Liberal circles.

However, the Liberal Biennial convention may have marked the unofficial starting gun on the leadership race, as names were floated around the convention hall and in hospitality suites. Sure, most of the likely contenders say they're not interested, but that's unlikely to quiet the rumours.

Today, a look at the ten most talked about names. Tomorrow, a look at some of the sleeper candidates.

Bob Rae

The case for Rae: Even Rae's harshest critics within the Liberal Party acknowledge he's done a bang-up job as interim leader and he's the best politician we have.

Is he a contender? If Rae runs, he'd have an impressive organization behind him. Do I think he'll be the next leader? No, not really. As Rae himself said in May, the party is likely to look to a new generation of leadership. But if you put $10 on Rae and asked me to put $10 on just one other name, I'd have a hard time thinking of someone who is more likely to be the next leader.

The case for LeBlanc: Young, experienced, bilingual. Deep Liberal roots, but still a fresh face for most.

Is he a contender? If I had to put a name down on that $10 bet I mentioned above, it would likely be on Dominic. He's got pieces of an organization left over from his 14 minute leadership run in 2008, and seems to be the only "high profile" candidate who has not categorically ruled out running.

The case for David: If you can't get Dalton, he'd be the next best thing. I likely wouldn't use that slogan on a button but, like his brother, David is experienced, rarely missteps, and has grown as a politician over the years.

Is he a contender? He'd have a better chance if he'd left Ottawa more than once or twice since being elected as an MP, but he's a capable politician and the McGuinty organization should not be underestimated.

13 Comments:

It takes a certain type of personality to have a successful run at and becoming Prime Minister. That type of personality is not content to be a back-bench nobody in a third party rump. If LeBlanc, Trudeau, Brison and the rest are willing to spend the prime years of their lives feigning outrage at the kind of patronage their party used to do, they don't have it. Resigning now to "spend more time with my family" and making big bucks in the private sector would be the first step in showing they have what it takes. Failing that, the next leader will likely be someone not in the current Liberal caucus.

You seem to be setting aside the seismic shift that happened at the convention: that non-paying "supporters" will be voting for the leader.

This means that the candidate has four constituencies to court: paid-up Liberal Party members, Liberal voters who don't have memberships, Conservative voters who can be persuaded, and NDP voters who can be persuaded.

Of those, the first group will be split among many of the candidates. The second group may or may not be energized, but will likely be split more or less along similar lines as the paid-up members.

The third group seems to be the one that everyone is worried about, but I don't see it being particularly influential - and there is no candidate one can foresee actively courting those people.

The fourth group - those who have voted NDP in the past but are willing to vote Liberal - are a large group, and wouldn't feel that they're betraying anything by participating in the Liberal leadership vote. And Rae has already begun actively courting them through his vocal support for NDP-friendly policies at the Convention.

The odd thing is that once Rae wins, those who supported other candidates can be easily pushed to less prominent roles as his own supporters take control of the Liberal Party. And those supporters will be much more closely aligned with NDP policies than the current Liberal leadership.

This race is about much more than one's personal appeal to die-hard Liberal partisans.

Trudeau says that he's not interested in running for the leadership this time around - too bad, that. Unless the Liberals get it right with a leadership pick this time, though, there may not be a next time around.

You're right, though, that Trudeau is a political superstar - or at least, as close to one as Canada gets. People pay attention to him. And that's not because of his accomplishments - his resume is pretty sparse, and he's never held a portfolio - but perhaps because he represents a generational shift in politics, not unlike his father did.

If he did run, campaigned well and capitalizes on that difference, he could indeed energize Canadians. Especially younger ones.

That sounds like exactly what the Liberals need, to ensure a 'next time around.'

And outside of the usual suspects: Andrew Coyne for Liberal leader! He's the only potential candidate, other than Jane Stewart, who is actually being pursued as a candidate by Liberals. He's got more supporters than Nycole Turmel and Jim Prentice!

Mind you, Trudeau would be much better than Coderre. Trudeau would represent the urge to simply forget the whole idea of actually running the country. Electing Coderre would represent something much uglier.

Can I throw an outside the box name out there? How about Jean Charest for Federal Liberal Leader? He's certainly got the political chops, Quebec voters are definitely up for grabs, and the PCs don't exist any more. He certainly could slot in these days as a Blue Grit.

Even crazier, and a lefter version of Charest would be Gary Doer. Though that seems far less likely.

A few things should stand out from this. First, Stephen Harper's candidacy in 2004 and 2006 represented the greatest age gap in modern Canadian elections.

Second, Trudeaumania cannot be explained in such terms - Pierre Trudeau was only 5 years younger than Stanfield. Trudeaumania happened because Pierre Trudeau was cool, not because he was young.

Third, change elections (where a new party took power) don't look very different from ones in which the incumbent stayed in office. Old geezers like Chretien (and Trudeau later in his administration) fared well, as did some young whippersnappers.

Pretty good post! I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to awriter.org say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.